View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Contextual Inquiry |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |  Knowledge Modeling Knowledge Mapping |  Agile Example Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When work processes are known only from accounts and the real context stays hidden, Contextual Inquiry makes behavior at the workplace visible. Observation and follow-up questions together show how people actually work, get interrupted, and improvise. | When a story needs clear checkpoints before implementation, it sharpens expectation and scope together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Acceptance Criteria and a Story Update. | Knowledge Mapping makes knowledge, gaps, and transfer paths visible across a field. It fits when expertise should not just exist but also be findable and transferable. | When a story carries business rules and exceptions, it brings clarity before implementation. It makes examples, open questions, and boundaries visible enough that the logic becomes jointly sound. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen | 20-40 min pro Story | 1-3 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 Beobachtungen | 3-6 | 3-12 | 3-7 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain Points | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update | Knowledge Map, Critical Knowledge Areas, Transfer Plan | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | UX researchObservationContext | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development | KnowledgeMappingRisk | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |